Appeal from the Order entered December 14, 2012, in the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County, Criminal Division, at No(s): CP-45-CR-00000024-2011.
BEFORE: ALLEN, OTT, and COLVILLE [*], JJ.
Cody Miller ("Appellant") appeals from the order entered December 14, 2012, subjecting him to the sex offender registration requirements set forth in Subchapter H of the Sentencing Code, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9799.10 et. seq., effective December 20, 2012. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
The trial court summarized the procedural history as follows:
On May 3, 2011, [Appellant] pled guilty to one count of Indecent Assault by Forcible Compulsion, 18 Pa.C.S.A. Section 3126(a)(2), a misdemeanor of the first degree. On August 15, 2011, Appellant was sentenced to nine to thirty-six months in the Monroe County Correctional Facility. He was further ordered to comply with the registration requirements of the version of Megan's Law that was in effect at the time. Under that version of the law, [Appellant] was required to register for ten years.
[Appellant] did not appeal the judgment of sentence. Similarly, [Appellant] did not seek reconsideration of or otherwise challenge the provision in the sentencing order requiring him to register as a sex offender.
[At the time of his sentencing in 2011, Appellant was subject to the registration requirements set forth in 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9791-9795.4. That version of Megan's Law subsequently expired and was recodified at 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9799.10-9799.41 effective December 20, 2012. The amended version of Megan's Law retroactively imposed new registration requirements on sex offenders such as Appellant, and required the trial court to notify the affected sex offenders of their new registration requirements.]
On December 14, 2012, [the trial court] convened a sex offender notification hearing ... to advise [Appellant] and other Monroe County sex offenders of their registration and reporting duties under the current version of Megan's Law and to give offenders required written notice of their obligations. The order [Appellant] is attempting to challenge in this appeal was issued at the conclusion of the hearing.
Trial Court Opinion, 3/14/13, at 2-3.
Appellant did not file any motions before the trial court challenging the December 14, 2012 order. Rather, on January 10, 2013, Appellant filed a notice of appeal to this Court. Both Appellant and the trial court have complied with Pa.R.A.P. 1925.
Appellant raises the following issues for our review:
I. WAS THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE HONORABLE TRIAL COURT PURSUANT TO Pa.R.CRIM.P. 720 A FINAL APPEALABLE ORDER PURSUANT TO Pa.R.A.P 341?
II. DOES THE [SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION AND NOTIFICATION ACT (SORNA)] REQUIREMENT THAT PERSONS CONVICTED OF OFFENSES COMMITTED PRIOR TO SORNA'S EFFECTIVE DATE REGISTER AS SEX OFFENDERS POSE ADDITIONAL PUNISHMENT IN VIOLATION OF THE EX POST FACTO CLAUSES OF ...